Which election was that?
Which election was that?
I did not say the DNC is the state. I am suggesting that the way the two-party system has developed is an indication of a failed state.
The DNC has rigged three primaries in a row, yet has continued to struggle against the same crook that can’t form a sentence. It doesn’t fit the exact definition of “failed state”, but do we need to split that hair?
So that everyone running for a House seat can get their position on record before the election, I suppose
If I understand the actual text of the law, it only refers to disputes that directly involve the U.S. This dispute does not. (Sure, the U.S. is indirectly involved, but we’re at least indirectly involved with everything.)
Yes, it would be stupid for him to involve himself, but Trump has done enough illegal shit that we don’t need to go looking for more.
The delegates/DNC are responsible here, not the media. If they’re all going to support Harris without any debate, the media can’t be faulted for reporting it.
I agree with the sentiment though. Harris has a lot of problems on her record and couldn’t even make it to Iowa in 2020. That she has enough connections to get picked as VP anyway doesn’t mean she has to be the default nominee.
That may be true now, but if she doesn’t maintain solid poll numbers over the next few weeks, the DNC won’t hesitate to replace her.
How is that the headline? Not that “the president’s priorities are fucked”, but that he used a naughty word in private when he was pissed?
Someone wrote an article about this?!? Obviously the porn-related trial should come
first.
Not for me. After nearly 20 years in retail, I can safely say that at least half the people out there are dumbasses. I’m sure that they’d vote for one of their kind.
But if the headline started with “Democrats demand…”, people wouldn’t stopped reading there.
At least they got the military covered. What a relief.
I have little doubt that the country will end up as some version of Trump's authoritarian state. The question is the timing.
I actually think that our best chance of avoiding it (in the long run) is another Trump victory. He will make those changes so abruptly that people will react far more strongly than if we slid into an authoritarian state gradually. I mean…think about the possibility of Trump having won in 2020. The DNC would have to accept that they need to nominate a truly progressive candidate, and people would be demanding change immediately. Instead, we're justifying Biden/Harris again because they're not Trump.
Of the many jokes I've heard over the years, I've forgotten most. This one, which I heard about 20 years ago, I've never forgotten, and it still hasn't gotten old.
Just like Connor Clapton.
Real front-line reporting.
Trump needs to be buried deep enough that he’s not a threat as an independent, and so they can win over some “swing” voters, but they don’t want to alienate his supporters. This is going to get really awkward.
He could be right, but it will come down to how the other Republican candidates handle it. If they get behind him and portray him as a martyr, there are certainly enough gullible ® voters to deliver the election. We’ll just need to see if the (D) turnout is strong enough to overcome that. On the other hand, if they unite against him, he’ll lose the nomination, run independently, and split the ® vote.
Option A is far more likely. We’ve seen over and over again that facts, legality, and consistency don’t matter, but appointing judges does. A disgraced scumbag that appoints who he’s told to appoint is infinitely more important than having “principles” without power.
I was going to say the “grab them by the pussy” tape was crossing the line, but yeah, treason as well.